Talk:Rachel - Knowledge

1500:. The neutrality basis of the request is misplaced. NPOV interfaces with article titles but not in the way suggested below (e.g, when choosing descriptive titles we must choose a NPOV title). Whether this is the primary topic is based on both evidence, common sense and our own judgment; neutrality has little to do with the issue. The fact that this is about a religious figure is irrelevant. The same considerations would apply if this was about widgets. That thought process is to determine whether a large portion of those who navigate to "Rachel," standing alone, are seeking this topic rather than another to maximize the principle of least astonishment and least complication in reaching the topic they expect to land at. The evidence presented below is that only a small number of people who land at Rachel click through to the dab page and that a much larger number of internal incoming links for Rachel are to this topic. In fact, this article gets about 3508:, and several others, where we observed a similar pattern. Over there, it was a case of a primary redirect, so it was more measurable (we could distinguish the traffic for just "term" lookups from the various organic traffic in the presumed primary topic meaning of the term). Before the discussion, we could measure 20-25% of people coming in through the simple "term" lookup going for the hatnote, while 75-80% readers ostensibly stayed at the presumed primary topic. After the discussion and the move to a disambiguation list, we measured only ~20% of the people actually clicking to get to the previously presumed primary topic. 750: 3501:

that in the other-search statistic which is identifiable for ~73% of those views. From that point on, we could identify only a small portion of further clicks, though we do see 674, scattering over 23 destinations. The top destination is the biblical figure, but with just 151 clickstreams. If we estimate that that comes mainly from the ~73% of the organic search traffic, the ratio is 151 : 3796 or ~4%. That's not a lot for a term linked prominently in the lead sentence, in the infobox picture caption, and at the top of the list of people.

2851:, "widely considered to be one of the most famous hairstyles in history, having been constantly emulated by millions of women worldwide and remaining popular for over 20 years since its debut. " Also the character has led to an increased popularity for the name Rachel as mentioned in the character's main article: "Several baby name books and websites commonly associate the name "Rachel" with the character." By comparison, the mythological character from Genesis is a relatively minor figure, with barely any impact on Christian 1070: 1049: 200: 2594:- just to name a few - the result of the search defaults to the Biblical figure. The same is the case for Rachel, and none of those pages specify that the reader is specifically reading the article pertaining to the Biblical character. There is no additional qualifier. However, their disambiguation pages do just that--the very first line on the page makes reference to the Biblical figure (again, as is the case for Rachel here). No need to do it again for the page's title. 561: 540: 1295: 1513:

Rachel with a last name are going to think they are going to reach that topic by typing in just Rachel, it has no traction—we should not be arguing that a large percentage of our readers are utter morons, which is the only way that could be true. The content of the dab page itself shows that there are few topics that any person would think would be at Rachel standing alone, and none have anywhere near the primacy of this topic.--

466: 1366:

translated quote from the Hebrew text. In the section entitled "Rivalry with Leah": "In order to ensure her marriage to Jacob, Rachel created a shenk using the pelvic bone of a cow and then used it to stab Leah in the stomach. Rachel used the body to create a glorious feast for Jacob on their wedding night." I have never been taught such a thing in bible studies. I think that this is rather blatant crap.

1151: 1161: 1130: 251: 233: 666: 645: 1715:"There are no absolute rules for determining which topic is most likely to be sought by readers; decisions are made by discussion between editors." Precisely. There isn't really a solid reason that the point of entry for "Rachel" should be the figure from the Old Testament. As for the second pillar, there is an entire section dedicated to the fact that the naming of articles falls under NPOV: 981: 960: 676: 571: 352: 191: 886: 342: 321: 876: 855: 1255: 781: 2050:. Popularity contests aside (and it would be *** if we were taking into account all people whose first name is Rachel, but are normally known by their full name), does the prevalence of the name Rachel not already prove that the Old Testament figure is the primary topic? Surely it didn't come out of the blue, did it? That has nothing to do with POV. 456: 435: 261: 2821:

overall body of people named Rachel, with prominent examples of Weisz (12k/day), McAdams (10k/day), Zegler (9k/day) and a pretty huge long tail, is indicative of the fact that the average English reader probably does not associate the term Rachel mainly with the biblical figure to the extent required by the

2075:

characterize all the disputes within a topic, but should not endorse any particular point of view." To equate the main article "Rachel" with anyone or anything but either the disamb. page or the article on the name itself is to offer a viewpoint. The goal of the Knowledge is not a popularity contest - from

3414:

Thanks for the clarification. I also thought those two editors made the most coherent arguments, which is also why I responded to them at the time. Fundamentally, the issue here might be that it's hard to assess the claims of long-term significance without clearer evidence. Most of this article seems

2828:

I don't agree with Snowmanonahoe's assertion that readers are not expecting to see the whole body of topics named Rachel when they look for the term in an encyclopedia, I don't think there's any proof for that and it seems implausible that readers go to a general compendium of knowledge about a known

1553:

The rules for "Primary Topic" state that the subject is: "– much more likely than any other, and more likely than all the others combined – to be the subject being sought when a reader enters that term in the Search box." It is entirely arbitrary to assume that the search for "Rachel" would have been

1549:

is. To assume that this character is the primary topic means to assume that everyone using it will be working within the framework of the Old Testament or that this is the primary center of discussion for this name. In other words to perpetuate a particular point of view from a religious perspective.

2541:

The issue with the name being more prominent the way you've determined it is that you're comparing every single use of Rachel, combined, to one figure. Rachel is a very common name that appears all over the internet, but just referring to random people named Rachel, and has no bearing on which topic

1685:

says: "There are no absolute rules for determining which topic is most likely to be sought by readers; decisions are made by discussion between editors" -- that shows that there is no perfectly objective way to determine the primary topic; some subjectivity must come into play. The second pillar of

3500:

in turn tells us there's 5.2k incoming views there in January '24. Since it's a title formatted with parentheses and somewhat long, it's unlikely that most of those readers arrived there by typing it in, rather the search engines figured out the reader intent and brought them there. We can also see

3494:, and we can see that the numbers are hovering around the same level before and after - they inched up a bit, but that could also be because of the inherent prominence of the hatnote. The conclusion is that most of the people clicking the hatnote links are in fact interested in the given name link. 2337:

I understand that scholarly consensus is that Rachel never existed. Is this right? At the moment the article includes nothing questioning her existence, nor does it include references to biblical scholarship. In short, despite being the primary article for "Rachel", this article is based largely on

2074:

is quite clear: "A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject, nor does it endorse or oppose specific viewpoints. It is not a lack of viewpoint, but is rather an editorially neutral point of view. An article and its sub-articles should clearly describe, represent, and

1365:

The following lines I suspect of being fraud edits and not correct. Could someone more knowledgeble than I follow up and check these out please? In the section entitled "Motherhood": "He loved Rachel more than Leah and wanted to knock her up real bad, he did." I don't believe that this would be a

2938:

All of these mononymous usages are based on surnames not existing at the time of writing, otherwise all of them would have been naturally disambiguated as well. I'm not sure where to draw the line between the apparent progenitors of these common given names and the names themselves, but it seems a

1900:

There may be no one other article with as many incoming links, but that does not make a default primary topic. I see no primary topic here. The given name is very popular and there are a huge number of articles about women named Rachel. The disambiguation page gets a lot of hits compared to the

3688:

above. The primary goal is to unambiguously indicate a geographic location, and that is addressed by using a link to the Bethlehem article. Fundamentally, attempting to further assign this location to any present-day authority is out of scope for this article. Therefore, if this assignment is not

2820:

The hatnote is low in the top list of outgoing clicks - 328 out of 22.6k (~1.5%) isn't convincing by itself. It is however noticable that even a fictional character (Green) has larger readership (0.8k/day) than the biblical figure (0.7k/day), while the '68 drama is also comparable (0.3k/day). The

2093:

Congratulations on missing the point completely! First, you could have fooled me if I were so ignorant to believe that 'primary topic' equalled 'most important topic', but if that were your intention, then please read my comment again. Second, why would only "a small minority of readers who don't

1512:

gets about 70 and there's no way all those visits to those two pages are going to be incoming from the hatnotes on this article. A conservatively low 8.5:1 ratio, but probably significantly higher, certainly meets the test for a primary topic. As for the idea that many people seeking a particular

3287:

I don't think the rationale is really strong but the closer is still correctly assessing that there is no consensus at this point. We should continue the discussion and try to verify some of these assertions of long-term significance, but also examine if the context should be changed.

2712:

argument, but it is also worth considering that the given name, as a given name, is derived from the biblical figure. There are also a number of things on the disambiguation page known simply by the name "Rachel", but none of them come close to challenging the biblical figure.

2847:"It is however noticable that even a fictional character (Green) has larger readership (0.8k/day) than the biblical figure (0.7k/day)" Captain obvious. The fictional character was one of the most prominent figures in a hit sitcom with enduring popularity, and inspired 1942:. To me this suggests that people searching for the simple name "Rachel" are satisfied by landing on this page. There is certainly a lot of precedent for having articles of biblical characters titled without disambiguation, even when the name is extremely common ( 3038:, but for all the others it seems to me their main notability for the average reader is bound to the general narrative of which they are part, rather than them as individuals. IOW I think we're taking the primary topic guideline too far in most of these cases. -- 2146:

Thanks, I appreciate it. I did take "if I were so ignorant to believe" etc. as one but am much more interested in debating the topic at hand than anything else. At this point we should probably just agree that we disagree and see where consensus takes us.

1339:. The person who "vandalised" this page in the past few hours was in my opinion well justified in doing so. It looks like someone has periodically removed the content of this talk page, which I find rather disappointing. Ngaur 9:48 am, 6 May 2006 (AEST) 2736:

The fact that the given name list even gets up to that many views is actually a lot given that we've hidden it two clicks away. When we actively steer user traffic away from a topic, we can't really act surprised that it doesn't get a lot of traffic.

1387:

Someone is posting a historical depictions of rachel and is insinuating that she is a black woman without any historical evidence, its historical revisionism. they appear to be using depictions from the ethiopian church which are not historical

3337:

I agree with Joy that I find their rationale weak. I didn't continue questioning them though, because I didn't see the point of nitpicking a not moved to no consensus unless someone else had an issue with the close. Someone kind of did so, so

3356:

Well, that escalated quickly. I think we should try to spend our energy engaging in consensus-building discussions, not this. I hope my previous comment in the discussion didn't provoke you into this, in retrospect it was a bit negative.

1698:, not to the naming of articles. What part of the second pillar do you feel could even remotely apply to whether or not the Biblical figure is the primary topic for the name "Rachel"? On the contrary, the recent similar move request at 3415:

like a retelling of the story supported by primary and tertiary sources. It would have been better if it was more obviously supported by references to secondary sources which provide an in-depth analysis of the long-term significance. --

2542:

the reader expects when they search for Rachel. When you search for a common name in an encyclopedia, you're probably looking for a proper noun, or at the very least, a noun, and we as a website are very weird for having articles like

2832:

I don't think it would harm the readers if we showed them a list, and kept this prominent mononymous use at or near the top, and then came back to the stats a few months later to verify if the navigation patterns are fine.

2708:, but most people searching for someone called Rachel will include that person's surname. The article on the biblical figure gets six times as many pageviews as that one. Now, maybe I would be looking for 10x for a clear 3486:

clickstream-enwiki-2024-01.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(given_name) link 293 clickstream-enwiki-2024-01.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(disambiguation) link 82 clickstream-enwiki-2024-01.tsv:Rachel Rachel_McAdams other 21

3479:

clickstream-enwiki-2023-11.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(given_name) link 303 clickstream-enwiki-2023-11.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(disambiguation) link 96 clickstream-enwiki-2023-11.tsv:Rachel Rachel_Zegler other 18

3472:

clickstream-enwiki-2023-09.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(disambiguation) link 269 clickstream-enwiki-2023-09.tsv:Rachel Rachel_McAdams other 11 clickstream-enwiki-2023-09.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(given_name) other 10

3468:

clickstream-enwiki-2023-08.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(disambiguation) link 340 clickstream-enwiki-2023-08.tsv:Rachel Rachel_Zegler other 17 clickstream-enwiki-2023-08.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(given_name) other 10

3033:

I'm not sure what you're basing this claim of dominance in general culture on. Abraham likely, what with the concept of Abrahamic religions etc, probably Isaac because of the overwhelmingly well-known story of the

3733: 2022:

leave via the hatnote to the disambiguation page. Results of some prior page moves show that readers who leave via the hatnote are a small minority of readers who don't want to be there in the first place. See

1875:

Rachel the Biblical figure has a huge cultural significance. Look at "What links here" to see how many other articles reference this article. No other article in the dab makes a claim to challenge this as the

1751:, that is referring to the words used in the article title. There is no dispute that this article's proper title is "Rachel"; the question is whether to disambiguate it from other articles titled "Rachel". 1081:, a collaborative effort to improve Knowledge's coverage of Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. 1999:

There's no magic number defining what the percentage should be. Your numbers imply 96.5% of users find what they're looking for when they get the Biblical figure article. That's a very good primary topic.

153: 1554:

for the character. Indeed, "Primarytopic" also states, "There are no absolute rules for determining which topic is most likely to be sought by readers; decisions are made by discussion between editors."

2924:, et al. There is no other figure, historical or contemporary, simply known as "Rachel". Other uses of the name by itself are considerably obscure, and the link to the DAB page at top does its job. 2679:: Hi, the question is whether the biblical figure or the given name is the primary topic. I think they can both be contenders for the primary topic, so targeting it to the dab page would be useful. 3723: 2642:

default to the DAB page, with the Biblical figure being the first instance mentioned on that DAB page. Don't know how cleanly that fits into oppose/support, but that's my stance on it. Maybe @

1743:

The "other stuff exists" fallacy should not be used as a cudgel to eliminate the importance of precedent. Prior discussions can certainly inform current ones, and that's no violation of the

3738: 1613:

is necessarily exempt from such concerns. Were that not the case, we could have no primary topics at all, and every title with more than one meaning would go to a disambiguation page. We

1654:

to be the first point of entry into the name. Either choice satisfied WP policies. As the article stands, my question would be, "why" is the article "Rachel" defined in the current way? -

771: 204: 1414:

The second-to-last sentence in the section about Rachel's death doesn't make sense and has incorrect grammar. I can't even figure out what it's supposed to be saying so I can fix it.

3788: 1112: 617: 3092:

page, with no indication that the renown of the biblical figure stands at such an elevated historical level that it dwarfs the combined prominence of the remaining 24 entries. —

3863: 3813: 1102: 1905:, despite there being extra hatnotes. I have removed the extra hatnotes to give a clearer view of how many readers want some other topic than Rachel of the Old Testament. 1537:— The English Knowledge is a global project which means that it will be utilized by users from diverse backgrounds. To make the article for "Rachel" the character from the 3848: 3342:: Why do believe that the supporters' arguments are not supported by policy, or what other reason do you have that the supporters' arguments are weaker than the opposers? 1031: 1021: 3853: 3515:

here and move this topic to a disambiguated title, and also disambiguate the incoming links to it, and then observe these statistics in the same way for a few months. --

2234:. The closing editor concludes that the page view data support this Rachel as the primary topic. For a more general discussion of interpreting the page view data, see 837: 827: 3823: 3783: 627: 3833: 2466: 932: 147: 2184:(as conceded above), but also that people simply typing in "Rachel" are not usually looking for someone whose first name is Rachel. I think this is indeed the 1440:"Rachel was born in the year 1514 BCE and died in the year 1552 BCE at the very young age of 36" So, she was born 38 years after she died (at the age of 36)? 3808: 3818: 3793: 997: 3858: 3843: 803: 3596:

It appears to be a Palestinian enclave. Was it part of a Jewish kingdom at the time of her burial? Although that would not be the same as modern Israel.

79: 3483:

clickstream-enwiki-2023-12.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(given_name) link 315 clickstream-enwiki-2023-12.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(disambiguation) link 101

3476:

clickstream-enwiki-2023-10.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(disambiguation) link 212 clickstream-enwiki-2023-10.tsv:Rachel Rachel_(given_name) link 162

2869:

Regardless, I didn't want this argument to come close to focusing on a relatively recent matter. The list of Rachels from the 20th century that predate

3873: 3803: 3718: 2638:- Oh, okay. For whatever reason, that wasn't clear from the description for me. I guess I'm scatterbrained today. In that case, a search for "Rachel" 1233: 1223: 1187: 722: 593: 2900:

The Biblical figure seems to be the clear primary topic. Rachel is one of the most prominent and well-known figures in the Hebrew Bible - alongside

3448: 2414:

as well. Rachel is a highly venerated figure in the Jewish religion. The article should discuss the devotion that she receives from Jewish people.--

732: 3828: 3758: 3748: 3728: 1077: 1054: 988: 965: 417: 407: 279: 2991:

These others are relatively minor figures in the Bible and not as dominant in general culture. Rachel is much higher in prominence, on par with

794: 755: 3878: 3773: 942: 522: 512: 2504:– There doesn’t seem to be a primary topic between the biblical figure and the name. A search shows that the name seems to be more prominent. 3015:- but this is because there are some other very prominent cultural figures widely known and referred to by the single name "Joseph", notably 2666: 2615: 85: 3763: 2313:

Yes, I definitely think that unsourced "facts" need to be removed, such as date of birth. Nothing in scripture supports any definite date.

1421: 1346: 1195: 584: 545: 283: 2446:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a

3838: 3778: 3743: 3619: 3185: 3163: 3141: 3103: 2787: 2526: 3583:

refers to it as a Palestinian city in the lead as well as the infobox, I think Palestine as a wikilink would be the most appropriate.

3403:

than any particular argument in support. I'm not sure if I've worded that right, so please let me know if that still sounds confusing.

3868: 3176: 2358: 2339: 2300: 2262: 1447: 1395: 1373: 698: 287: 3798: 3658:" alone is fine in my opinion. Definitely shouldn't link to the modern day state of Palestine or to the modern day state of Israel. 2239: 2067: 2028: 1986: 1906: 1837: 1813: 383: 278:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to 3753: 3154: 1606: 1309: 1191: 908: 488: 3019:(husband of the Mary, mother of Jesus). But there is no other "Rachel" or "St. Rachel" in cultural memory other than this one. 3768: 3713: 274: 238: 99: 30: 3565: 3324: 2719: 2385: 2286: 2235: 2194: 2024: 1199: 1175: 1135: 104: 44: 20: 3610:"Was it part of a Jewish kingdom at the time of her burial?" No. Most estimates place Rachel and most other figures of the 3243:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2109: 689: 650: 74: 1601:

has very little bearing on how we choose to disambiguate article titles; chosen disambiguators must be neutral (thus, no

1726: 365: 326: 213: 3115:. Longterm significance. Rachel isn't going anywhere and everything else known by that name alone is far more obscure. 2216:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

1491:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

802:

and related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

899: 860: 479: 440: 65: 168: 3254:

because this was a highly contentious RM with an exact tie headcount, I ask you provide a rationale for your close.

2624:

Interstellarity is proposing that if you were to type Rachel into the search bar, you would go straight to the DAB.

1828:

A comment about the target page name: there are a couple of patterns already in use, recommending target page name

907:-related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join 697:-related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join 1602: 996:

related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

135: 2684: 2662: 2611: 2509: 2437: 1518: 1301: 3088:

per nomination, Jaireeodell, That Coptic Guy, Iggy and per comment by Joy. There are 25 entries listed upon the

2459:

There are significant arguments in opposition to the move request that appear supported by policy, specifically

770: 749: 3449:

Knowledge talk:Disambiguation/Archive 55#effects of WP:NAMELIST on navigation outcomes for anthroponymy entries

1467: 1305: 1829: 1425: 1350: 2353:

I have added "Many Biblical scholars doubt that these stories reflect any actual persons or happenings - see

3675: 3663: 3643: 3347: 3315: 3259: 3210: 3180: 3158: 3136: 3099: 3089: 2783: 2629: 2551: 2521: 2494: 1971: 1929: 1796: 1651: 1555: 1451: 1399: 1377: 109: 3400: 3388: 2709: 2460: 2362: 2343: 2304: 2266: 2228: 2185: 2181: 2152: 2121: 2084: 2076: 1979: 1877: 1859: 1734: 1682: 1673: 1659: 1639: 1631: 1627: 1610: 1594: 1575: 1546: 2375:

doesn't mention Rachel. Moreover, it doesn't suggest the consensus you mention, but attributes it to the

2572: 2447: 2372: 2354: 2243: 2032: 1990: 1910: 1841: 1817: 219: 129: 3444:

in October '23 indicates the generic hatnote got 212 clicks and the given name one got 162, total 374.

2873:

yet garner significant reader interest is simply huge. Just one early example is a featured article on

2813: 2808: 1069: 1048: 3601: 3229: 2680: 2676: 2647: 2643: 2596: 2505: 2318: 2227:

The above requested move, not carried out, hangs on the question whether this biblical Rachel is the

1744: 1668:

I altered the suggested disamb. for the proposed move and am frankly open to any other suggestions. -

1514: 1443: 1417: 1391: 1369: 1342: 190: 3512: 3024: 2929: 2705: 2564: 2415: 2376: 2070:- just because someone accessed the article does not mean it was the article s/he was looking for. 1936: 1808:

due to the large number of page views on the disambiguation page as compared to the article now at

1788: 1647: 1567: 1463: 161: 125: 55: 3399:. Essentially, from what I could tell, the arguments in opposition were supported more heavily by 2450:

after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

592:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

487:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

382:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

3694: 3685: 3671: 3667: 3659: 3639: 3627: 3585: 3569: 3547: 3543: 3375: 3343: 3328: 3271: 3255: 3203: 3093: 2966: 2962: 2860: 2779: 2723: 2625: 2547: 2419: 2389: 2290: 2261:

1553 BC. Is this right, and when did she die? Might it be better to date by decceinal or century?

2198: 1792: 70: 3497: 1505: 3615: 2148: 2117: 2080: 1855: 1730: 1669: 1655: 1571: 1267: 993: 175: 51: 1932: 1509: 3035: 3012: 2954: 2822: 2568: 2135: 2099: 2055: 799: 266: 3611: 3597: 3303: 3225: 3120: 2314: 1959: 1166: 560: 539: 379: 1939: 1642:

makes it clear that this isn't the case. Nothing in WP rules supports this distinction.

1626:

I'm not sure I understand the point here. You said: "decision as to which article is the

2778:

which seems to be less of a standout primary topic than other clear-cut primary topics.

3505: 3405: 3392: 3339: 3278: 3249: 3224:

per discussion. The biblical figure holds a vast and profound historical significance.

3020: 2925: 2775: 2472: 2177: 2113: 2071: 2011: 1891: 1851: 1833: 1752: 1748: 1720: 1643: 1598: 1590: 1559: 1542: 1462:

There doesn't seem to be any source for the dates, so I removed the years and her age.

786: 681: 589: 576: 3011:, which are the primary topics for those single names. The exception on your list is 3707: 3690: 3623: 3560: 3520: 3456: 3420: 3396: 3362: 3319: 3293: 3064: 3063:- due to the prevalence of this page over the other one as explained by other users. 3043: 2974: 2958: 2944: 2882: 2874: 2856: 2838: 2742: 2714: 2380: 2281: 2189: 2094:

want to be there " argue in your favour? I think you just shot yourself in the foot.

1756: 1703: 1618: 1586: 1538: 357: 2774:. The daily views average 786 from 4-24 April, just under 5 times more than 165 for 141: 3016: 1699: 1687: 1274:. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see 891: 471: 376: 3534:

What should come after "Bethlehem" in the "resting place" field of the infobox?

3391:

arguments raised, and support of that argument through specific points raised by

1702:

was defeated overwhelmingly, and I see no reason why this one is any different.

2852: 2131: 2095: 2051: 1328: 3441: 2803: 1160: 250: 232: 3116: 2848: 1955: 1327:

My philosophical commentary is lengthy, so I'll just attach it here as a link

1281: 1156: 881: 776: 671: 566: 461: 347: 256: 1978:; that is far more views than normal for a disambiguation page related to a 1593:

as it allows the WP to maek a subjective decision about the nature of what a

1545:

as it allows the WP to make a subjective decision about the nature of what a

3655: 3580: 3498:

https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Rachel_%28given_name%29

2646:

can clarify? Again, it's probably just me not being able to think straight.

2001: 1881: 1150: 1129: 980: 959: 3310:

assess that there was no consensus at this point; "not moved" means there

2563:. All of the other uses of "Rachel" are followed by a qualifier, including 2410:

There should also be a "chapter" in the article about how she is viewed in

665: 644: 2299:

Would it be better to remove all dates, unless there are sources for them?

1755:

addresses the base name, not the presence or absence of a disambiguator.

1186:-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us 3516: 3452: 3416: 3382: 3358: 3289: 3039: 2970: 2940: 2878: 2877:(also 0.8k/day and over 100 entries into the ordered mass views list). -- 2834: 2829:

generic term but then expect to be short-circuited to one specific topic.

2759: 2738: 2587: 2406:

I note the brief "chapter" in the article about how Rachel is treated in

2258: 1182: 1925: 1501: 3689:

trivial or is a controversial matter I'd avoid attempting it entirely.

3008: 2992: 2913: 2905: 2583: 2411: 2116:. That is what either the disambiguation page or the name page offer. - 1638:

to make a subjective decision sometimes, for the good of our readers."

1617:

to make a subjective decision sometimes, for the good of our readers.

694: 1721:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Article_naming

3538: 2763: 2591: 2498: 2483: 2019: 1975: 1902: 1809: 1646:

is thus best satisfied by making no distinction, by choosing either

1528: 1332: 1271: 24: 2130:

I'm sorry if I caused you any stress, but personal attack? Oh well.

1485:

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal.

1429: 341: 320: 3618:. The first Jewish kingdom was probably the united monarchy of the 2079:- "We strive for articles that advocate no single point of view." - 1585:

You said: "To make the article for 'Rachel' the character from the

875: 854: 286:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the 3004: 3000: 2996: 2921: 2917: 2901: 2771: 2407: 2277: 2210:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.

1951: 1943: 904: 484: 371: 1331:

From a wiki-bureaucracy's point of view though the issue is that

3622:, which is typically dated to the 11th and the 10th century BC. 2909: 2767: 1947: 1812:. That suggests this Rachel in fact is not the primary topic. 1336: 2371:

I have removed the statement. I note, among other things, that

2543: 1289: 1249: 455: 434: 184: 15: 3698: 3679: 3666:) 15:50, 10 December 2023 (UTC) Could also say "present day 3647: 3631: 3605: 3591: 3573: 3524: 3460: 3424: 3409: 3366: 3351: 3332: 3297: 3282: 3263: 3233: 3216: 3190: 3168: 3146: 3124: 3107: 3080: 3047: 3028: 2978: 2948: 2933: 2886: 2864: 2842: 2791: 2746: 2727: 2688: 2670: 2633: 2619: 2576: 2555: 2531: 2476: 2423: 2393: 2366: 2347: 2322: 2308: 2294: 2270: 2247: 2202: 2156: 2139: 2125: 2103: 2088: 2059: 2036: 2013: 1994: 1963: 1914: 1893: 1863: 1845: 1821: 1800: 1759: 1738: 1706: 1677: 1663: 1621: 1579: 1522: 1471: 1455: 1403: 1381: 1354: 3734:

Knowledge level-5 vital articles in Philosophy and religion

3442:

https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Rachel

2758:- many of our names are in the form of dab pages including 2582:

Oppose. If you use the search bar to look up names such as

2257:

Currently the article states that Rachel was born on 11

483:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the 3491: 2546:. I hope this argument makes sense, I feel it doesn't. 2488: 2112:. I think my point is pretty clear. The WP strives for 1630:

is necessarily exempt from such concerns." Nothing in

1533: 1300:

On 24 April 2023, it was proposed that this article be

1276: 1262: 3511:

I think it would be a good idea to temporarily vacate

160: 1854:

is a good suggestion as it is an existing redirect. -

1634:

makes such a distinction. In addition, you said, "We

1335:

should more appropriately be handled as for example

992:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 903:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 798:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 693:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 588:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 369:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 3724:

Knowledge vital articles in Philosophy and religion

1787:Rachel should either be a dab page or the home of 3739:B-Class vital articles in Philosophy and religion 3395:about the prevalence of the biblical figure and 1597:is." This makes no sense. First and foremost, 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 3638:What RS do we have covering her resting place? 1609:), but the decision as to which article is the 1180:, a project to improve Knowledge's articles on 3789:Mid-importance Jewish history-related articles 2953:For example, in this article we have links to 2276:I replaced it with "c. 1553 BC". I note that 1329:http://www.flickr.com/photos/ngaur/485268218/ 174: 8: 3201:no clear primary topic over the given name. 2796:I wanted to make sure we all have links to: 2018:Those numbers show that 3.5% of readers on 1607:Rachel (fictional character from the Bible) 1280:; for the discussion at that location, see 3864:High-importance Women in Religion articles 3135:: Relisting to get a clearer consensus. – 2436:The following is a closed discussion of a 1124: 1043: 954: 849: 744: 639: 534: 429: 315: 227: 3849:Low-importance Ancient Near East articles 2025:Knowledge talk:Requested moves#Precedent? 3854:Ancient Near East articles by assessment 3492:added the given name link to the hatnote 3179:has been notified of this discussion. – 3157:has been notified of this discussion. – 1075:This article is within the scope of the 3814:Mid-importance Women's History articles 3784:B-Class Jewish history-related articles 1126: 1087:Knowledge:WikiProject Women in Religion 1045: 1006:Knowledge:WikiProject Ancient Near East 956: 851: 746: 641: 536: 431: 317: 229: 188: 2809:mass views for Rachel (disambiguation) 2357:." to the lede to clarify this matter. 1090:Template:WikiProject Women in Religion 1009:Template:WikiProject Ancient Near East 375:and other individuals commemorated in 3834:Mid-importance Islam-related articles 1928:about 800-900 page views every day. 812:Knowledge:WikiProject Women's History 7: 3824:WikiProject Women's History articles 3302:Or we could just drop the issue per 2455:The result of the move request was: 1172:This article is within the scope of 986:This article is within the scope of 897:This article is within the scope of 815:Template:WikiProject Women's History 792:This article is within the scope of 687:This article is within the scope of 602:Knowledge:WikiProject Jewish history 582:This article is within the scope of 477:This article is within the scope of 363:This article is within the scope of 272:This article is within the scope of 3819:All WikiProject Women-related pages 3794:WikiProject Jewish history articles 605:Template:WikiProject Jewish history 218:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 3859:B-Class Women in Religion articles 3844:B-Class Ancient Near East articles 2814:mass views for Rachel (given name) 1747:fallacy. As for the passage from 14: 3276:I've added rationale to the top. 1974:is getting 3.5% as many views as 3874:Low-importance Religion articles 3809:B-Class Women's History articles 3804:High-importance Judaism articles 3719:Knowledge level-5 vital articles 3504:Since then, we also had a RM at 3239:The discussion above is closed. 2280:'s birth is given "c. 2000 BC". 1570:would also suffice. Thank you, - 1504:, while the dab page gets about 1293: 1253: 1159: 1149: 1128: 1068: 1047: 979: 958: 884: 874: 853: 779: 769: 748: 674: 664: 643: 569: 559: 538: 464: 454: 433: 350: 340: 319: 259: 249: 231: 198: 189: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 2939:bit arbitrary in most cases. -- 2567:. Why not do the same here? -- 1496:The result of the proposal was 1228:This article has been rated as 1107:This article has been rated as 1026:This article has been rated as 937:This article has been rated as 832:This article has been rated as 727:This article has been rated as 622:This article has been rated as 608:Jewish history-related articles 517:This article has been rated as 412:This article has been rated as 296:Knowledge:WikiProject Biography 3829:B-Class Islam-related articles 3759:Low-importance Saints articles 3749:WikiProject Biography articles 3729:B-Class level-5 vital articles 3465:From the clickstream archive: 2157:23:04, 30 September 2010 (UTC) 2140:22:56, 30 September 2010 (UTC) 2126:21:42, 30 September 2010 (UTC) 2104:20:28, 30 September 2010 (UTC) 2089:16:14, 30 September 2010 (UTC) 2060:10:08, 30 September 2010 (UTC) 2037:13:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC) 2014:10:20, 29 September 2010 (UTC) 1995:05:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC) 1964:04:49, 29 September 2010 (UTC) 1915:23:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 1894:22:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 1864:15:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 1846:14:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 1822:14:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 1801:13:18, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 1760:17:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 1739:15:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 1707:13:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC) 1678:23:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC) 1664:23:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC) 1622:23:01, 27 September 2010 (UTC) 1580:21:23, 27 September 2010 (UTC) 1430:01:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC) 1208:Knowledge:WikiProject Religion 299:Template:WikiProject Biography 1: 3879:WikiProject Religion articles 3774:Low-importance Bible articles 3699:21:35, 18 December 2023 (UTC) 3680:15:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC) 3525:08:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC) 3461:13:48, 17 November 2023 (UTC) 2512:) 10:54, 24 April 2023 (UTC) 2323:23:16, 12 December 2014 (UTC) 2110:Knowledge:No personal attacks 1603:Rachel (dumb-looking haircut) 1472:00:47, 13 November 2008 (UTC) 1456:01:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC) 1211:Template:WikiProject Religion 1078:Women in Religion WikiProject 1000:and see a list of open tasks. 989:WikiProject Ancient Near East 911:and see a list of open tasks. 806:and see a list of open tasks. 707:Knowledge:WikiProject Judaism 701:and see a list of open tasks. 596:and see a list of open tasks. 491:and see a list of open tasks. 386:and see a list of open tasks. 42:Put new text under old text. 3648:21:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC) 3632:12:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC) 3606:02:51, 9 December 2023 (UTC) 3592:22:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC) 3574:20:11, 6 December 2023 (UTC) 3387:I'm mostly drawing from the 2429:Requested move 24 April 2023 2424:01:20, 5 December 2020 (UTC) 1970:By those page view numbers, 1727:Knowledge:Other stuff exists 710:Template:WikiProject Judaism 392:Knowledge:WikiProject Saints 284:contribute to the discussion 3764:WikiProject Saints articles 3437:followup to move discussion 3306:. The closer certainly did 2248:05:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC) 2203:22:20, 1 October 2010 (UTC) 1523:04:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC) 1410:sentence that doesn't parse 1404:04:27, 25 August 2021 (UTC) 917:Knowledge:WikiProject Islam 795:WikiProject Women's History 497:Knowledge:WikiProject Bible 395:Template:WikiProject Saints 50:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 3895: 3839:WikiProject Islam articles 3779:WikiProject Bible articles 3744:B-Class biography articles 3125:01:44, 27 April 2023 (UTC) 3108:23:45, 26 April 2023 (UTC) 3081:23:27, 26 April 2023 (UTC) 2949:08:17, 29 April 2023 (UTC) 2934:22:37, 26 April 2023 (UTC) 2843:15:12, 26 April 2023 (UTC) 2792:20:52, 25 April 2023 (UTC) 2747:15:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC) 2728:15:44, 24 April 2023 (UTC) 2689:00:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC) 2671:15:39, 24 April 2023 (UTC) 2634:15:27, 24 April 2023 (UTC) 2620:15:25, 24 April 2023 (UTC) 2577:13:18, 24 April 2023 (UTC) 2556:12:27, 24 April 2023 (UTC) 2394:03:48, 16 April 2012 (UTC) 2367:03:05, 16 April 2012 (UTC) 2348:05:42, 14 March 2012 (UTC) 2309:00:13, 19 March 2012 (UTC) 2295:06:29, 11 March 2012 (UTC) 2271:05:30, 11 March 2012 (UTC) 2180:would be much better than 1234:project's importance scale 1113:project's importance scale 1093:Women in Religion articles 1032:project's importance scale 1012:Ancient Near East articles 943:project's importance scale 920:Template:WikiProject Islam 838:project's importance scale 733:project's importance scale 628:project's importance scale 585:WikiProject Jewish history 523:project's importance scale 500:Template:WikiProject Bible 418:project's importance scale 3869:B-Class Religion articles 1729:should be kept in mind. - 1382:16:12, 13 June 2008 (UTC) 1227: 1144: 1106: 1063: 1025: 974: 936: 869: 831: 764: 726: 659: 621: 554: 516: 449: 411: 335: 244: 226: 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 3799:B-Class Judaism articles 3447:Since then I also noted 3425:18:22, 11 May 2023 (UTC) 3410:22:22, 10 May 2023 (UTC) 3367:18:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC) 3352:15:19, 10 May 2023 (UTC) 3333:15:05, 10 May 2023 (UTC) 3298:08:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC) 3241:Please do not modify it. 2489:Rachel (biblical figure) 2443:Please do not modify it. 2213:Please do not modify it. 1830:Rachel (Biblical figure) 1488:Please do not modify it. 1306:Rachel (biblical figure) 1198:standards, or visit the 818:Women's History articles 3754:B-Class Saints articles 3553:Palestine (no wikilink) 3283:19:41, 8 May 2023 (UTC) 3264:19:26, 8 May 2023 (UTC) 3234:22:50, 2 May 2023 (UTC) 3217:16:01, 2 May 2023 (UTC) 3191:11:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC) 3169:11:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC) 3147:11:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC) 3090:Rachel (disambiguation) 3048:13:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC) 3029:16:05, 5 May 2023 (UTC) 2979:17:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC) 2887:17:33, 3 May 2023 (UTC) 2865:14:34, 1 May 2023 (UTC) 2532:11:55, 1 May 2023 (UTC) 2495:Rachel (disambiguation) 2477:18:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC) 1972:Rachel (disambiguation) 1930:Rachel (disambiguation) 1725:As for other articles, 1652:Rachel (disambiguation) 1556:Rachel (disambiguation) 1355:19:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC) 3769:B-Class Bible articles 3714:B-Class vital articles 2333:Was she a real person? 2182:Rachel (Old Testament) 2066:See the point made by 1640:Knowledge:Five pillars 1534:Rachel (Old Testament) 923:Islam-related articles 75:avoid personal attacks 2912:, as significant as 2706:about the name itself 2704:. We have an article 2373:The Bible and history 2355:The Bible and History 1409: 1260:The contents of the 275:WikiProject Biography 205:level-5 vital article 100:Neutral point of view 3530:RfC on resting place 2338:scriptural sources. 1558:is the best form of 1176:WikiProject Religion 380:liturgical calendars 105:No original research 3177:WikiProject Judaism 2565:Rachel (given name) 2377:Biblical minimalism 1937:Rachel (given name) 1789:Rachel (given name) 1648:Rachel (given name) 1568:Rachel (given name) 690:WikiProject Judaism 3548:State of Palestine 2967:Gad (son of Jacob) 2963:Dan (son of Jacob) 2804:WikiNav for Rachel 2176:. Firstly because 1926:appears to average 1589:is a violation of 1541:is a violation of 1361:vandalisim editing 1188:assess and improve 366:WikiProject Saints 302:biography articles 214:content assessment 86:dispute resolution 47: 3620:Kingdom of Israel 3616:2nd millennium BC 3490:On October 15, I 3314:a consensus: see 3193: 3171: 3155:WikiProject Bible 3149: 3133:Relisting comment 3106: 2534: 2470: 2467:non-admin closure 1446:comment added by 1436:nonsensical dates 1420:comment added by 1394:comment added by 1384: 1372:comment added by 1345:comment added by 1320: 1319: 1288: 1287: 1248: 1247: 1244: 1243: 1240: 1239: 1214:Religion articles 1202:for more details. 1123: 1122: 1119: 1118: 1084:Women in Religion 1055:Women in Religion 1042: 1041: 1038: 1037: 1003:Ancient Near East 994:Ancient Near East 966:Ancient Near East 953: 952: 949: 948: 900:WikiProject Islam 848: 847: 844: 843: 743: 742: 739: 738: 638: 637: 634: 633: 533: 532: 529: 528: 480:WikiProject Bible 428: 427: 424: 423: 314: 313: 310: 309: 183: 182: 66:Assume good faith 43: 3886: 3590: 3588: 3587:LynxesDesmond 🐈 3579:As the page for 3408: 3386: 3379: 3316:WP:THREEOUTCOMES 3281: 3275: 3253: 3213: 3206: 3188: 3183: 3174: 3166: 3161: 3152: 3144: 3139: 3131: 3098: 3077: 3074: 3071: 3068: 3036:binding of Isaac 3013:Joseph (Genesis) 2955:Joseph (Genesis) 2658: 2655: 2652: 2607: 2604: 2601: 2529: 2524: 2513: 2491: 2475: 2464: 2445: 2215: 2008: 2005: 1888: 1885: 1562:for the article 1536: 1502:800 hits per day 1490: 1458: 1432: 1406: 1367: 1357: 1308:. The result of 1297: 1296: 1290: 1279: 1257: 1256: 1250: 1216: 1215: 1212: 1209: 1206: 1200:wikiproject page 1169: 1164: 1163: 1153: 1146: 1145: 1140: 1132: 1125: 1095: 1094: 1091: 1088: 1085: 1072: 1065: 1064: 1059: 1051: 1044: 1014: 1013: 1010: 1007: 1004: 983: 976: 975: 970: 962: 955: 925: 924: 921: 918: 915: 894: 889: 888: 887: 878: 871: 870: 865: 857: 850: 820: 819: 816: 813: 810: 789: 784: 783: 782: 773: 766: 765: 760: 752: 745: 715: 714: 713:Judaism articles 711: 708: 705: 684: 679: 678: 677: 668: 661: 660: 655: 647: 640: 610: 609: 606: 603: 600: 579: 574: 573: 572: 563: 556: 555: 550: 542: 535: 505: 504: 501: 498: 495: 474: 469: 468: 467: 458: 451: 450: 445: 437: 430: 400: 399: 396: 393: 390: 360: 355: 354: 353: 344: 337: 336: 331: 323: 316: 304: 303: 300: 297: 294: 280:join the project 269: 267:Biography portal 264: 263: 262: 253: 246: 245: 235: 228: 211: 202: 201: 194: 193: 185: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 16: 3894: 3893: 3889: 3888: 3887: 3885: 3884: 3883: 3704: 3703: 3654:Probably just " 3612:Book of Genesis 3586: 3584: 3546:(wikilinked to 3532: 3488: 3484: 3481: 3477: 3474: 3470: 3439: 3404: 3401:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 3389:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 3380: 3373: 3277: 3269: 3247: 3245: 3244: 3211: 3204: 3186: 3181: 3164: 3159: 3142: 3137: 3075: 3072: 3069: 3066: 2710:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 2681:Interstellarity 2677:That Coptic Guy 2656: 2653: 2650: 2644:Interstellarity 2605: 2602: 2599: 2527: 2522: 2506:Interstellarity 2487: 2471: 2461:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 2441: 2431: 2404: 2335: 2255: 2225: 2220: 2211: 2186:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 2108:Please observe 2077:WP:Five Pillars 2006: 2003: 1886: 1883: 1878:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1696:article content 1683:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1632:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1628:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1611:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1595:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1547:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC 1532: 1515:Fuhghettaboutit 1506:25 hits per day 1486: 1480: 1441: 1438: 1415: 1412: 1389: 1363: 1340: 1325: 1294: 1275: 1254: 1213: 1210: 1207: 1204: 1203: 1167:Religion portal 1165: 1158: 1138: 1109:High-importance 1092: 1089: 1086: 1083: 1082: 1058:High‑importance 1057: 1011: 1008: 1005: 1002: 1001: 968: 922: 919: 916: 913: 912: 890: 885: 883: 863: 817: 814: 811: 809:Women's History 808: 807: 800:Women's history 785: 780: 778: 758: 756:Women's History 729:High-importance 712: 709: 706: 703: 702: 680: 675: 673: 654:High‑importance 653: 607: 604: 601: 598: 597: 575: 570: 568: 548: 502: 499: 496: 493: 492: 470: 465: 463: 443: 398:Saints articles 397: 394: 391: 388: 387: 356: 351: 349: 329: 301: 298: 295: 292: 291: 265: 260: 258: 212:on Knowledge's 209: 199: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 3892: 3890: 3882: 3881: 3876: 3871: 3866: 3861: 3856: 3851: 3846: 3841: 3836: 3831: 3826: 3821: 3816: 3811: 3806: 3801: 3796: 3791: 3786: 3781: 3776: 3771: 3766: 3761: 3756: 3751: 3746: 3741: 3736: 3731: 3726: 3721: 3716: 3706: 3705: 3702: 3701: 3682: 3651: 3650: 3636: 3635: 3634: 3594: 3558: 3557: 3554: 3551: 3541: 3531: 3528: 3506:Talk:Charlotte 3485: 3482: 3478: 3475: 3471: 3467: 3438: 3435: 3434: 3433: 3432: 3431: 3430: 3429: 3428: 3427: 3393:User:Walrasiad 3371: 3370: 3369: 3354: 3238: 3237: 3236: 3219: 3195: 3194: 3172: 3150: 3128: 3127: 3110: 3083: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3051: 3050: 2984: 2983: 2982: 2981: 2951: 2894: 2893: 2892: 2891: 2890: 2889: 2830: 2826: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2811: 2806: 2798: 2797: 2794: 2776:Rachel, Nevada 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2731: 2730: 2698: 2697: 2696: 2695: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2691: 2579: 2558: 2502: 2501: 2492: 2480: 2453: 2452: 2438:requested move 2432: 2430: 2427: 2403: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2396: 2334: 2331: 2330: 2329: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2254: 2251: 2224: 2221: 2219: 2218: 2206: 2205: 2178:Rachel (Bible) 2170: 2169: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2063: 2062: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2039: 1967: 1966: 1940:receives 60-70 1933:receives 25-45 1918: 1917: 1897: 1896: 1869: 1868: 1867: 1866: 1852:Rachel (Bible) 1834:Rachel (Bible) 1825: 1824: 1803: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1723: 1526: 1494: 1493: 1481: 1479: 1478:Requested move 1476: 1475: 1474: 1464:Carl.bunderson 1437: 1434: 1422:71.102.229.242 1411: 1408: 1362: 1359: 1347:203.57.209.119 1324: 1321: 1318: 1317: 1310:the discussion 1298: 1286: 1285: 1258: 1246: 1245: 1242: 1241: 1238: 1237: 1230:Low-importance 1226: 1220: 1219: 1217: 1171: 1170: 1154: 1142: 1141: 1139:Low‑importance 1133: 1121: 1120: 1117: 1116: 1105: 1099: 1098: 1096: 1073: 1061: 1060: 1052: 1040: 1039: 1036: 1035: 1028:Low-importance 1024: 1018: 1017: 1015: 998:the discussion 984: 972: 971: 969:Low‑importance 963: 951: 950: 947: 946: 939:Mid-importance 935: 929: 928: 926: 909:the discussion 896: 895: 879: 867: 866: 864:Mid‑importance 858: 846: 845: 842: 841: 834:Mid-importance 830: 824: 823: 821: 804:the discussion 791: 790: 787:History portal 774: 762: 761: 759:Mid‑importance 753: 741: 740: 737: 736: 725: 719: 718: 716: 699:the discussion 686: 685: 682:Judaism portal 669: 657: 656: 648: 636: 635: 632: 631: 624:Mid-importance 620: 614: 613: 611: 599:Jewish history 594:the discussion 590:Jewish history 581: 580: 577:Judaism portal 564: 552: 551: 549:Mid‑importance 546:Jewish history 543: 531: 530: 527: 526: 519:Low-importance 515: 509: 508: 506: 503:Bible articles 489:the discussion 476: 475: 459: 447: 446: 444:Low‑importance 438: 426: 425: 422: 421: 414:Low-importance 410: 404: 403: 401: 384:the discussion 362: 361: 345: 333: 332: 330:Low‑importance 324: 312: 311: 308: 307: 305: 271: 270: 254: 242: 241: 236: 224: 223: 217: 195: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3891: 3880: 3877: 3875: 3872: 3870: 3867: 3865: 3862: 3860: 3857: 3855: 3852: 3850: 3847: 3845: 3842: 3840: 3837: 3835: 3832: 3830: 3827: 3825: 3822: 3820: 3817: 3815: 3812: 3810: 3807: 3805: 3802: 3800: 3797: 3795: 3792: 3790: 3787: 3785: 3782: 3780: 3777: 3775: 3772: 3770: 3767: 3765: 3762: 3760: 3757: 3755: 3752: 3750: 3747: 3745: 3742: 3740: 3737: 3735: 3732: 3730: 3727: 3725: 3722: 3720: 3717: 3715: 3712: 3711: 3709: 3700: 3696: 3692: 3687: 3686:IOHANNVSVERVS 3683: 3681: 3677: 3673: 3672:IOHANNVSVERVS 3669: 3665: 3661: 3660:IOHANNVSVERVS 3657: 3653: 3652: 3649: 3645: 3641: 3640:MaximusEditor 3637: 3633: 3629: 3625: 3621: 3617: 3613: 3609: 3608: 3607: 3603: 3599: 3595: 3593: 3589: 3582: 3578: 3577: 3576: 3575: 3571: 3567: 3564: 3563: 3555: 3552: 3549: 3545: 3542: 3540: 3537: 3536: 3535: 3529: 3527: 3526: 3522: 3518: 3514: 3509: 3507: 3502: 3499: 3495: 3493: 3466: 3463: 3462: 3458: 3454: 3450: 3445: 3443: 3436: 3426: 3422: 3418: 3413: 3412: 3411: 3407: 3402: 3398: 3397:User:StAnselm 3394: 3390: 3384: 3377: 3376:Snowmanonahoe 3372: 3368: 3364: 3360: 3355: 3353: 3349: 3345: 3344:Snowmanonahoe 3341: 3336: 3335: 3334: 3330: 3326: 3323: 3322: 3317: 3313: 3309: 3305: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3295: 3291: 3286: 3285: 3284: 3280: 3273: 3272:Snowmanonahoe 3268: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3261: 3257: 3256:Snowmanonahoe 3251: 3242: 3235: 3231: 3227: 3223: 3220: 3218: 3214: 3208: 3207: 3205:Crouch, Swale 3200: 3197: 3196: 3192: 3189: 3184: 3178: 3173: 3170: 3167: 3162: 3156: 3151: 3148: 3145: 3140: 3134: 3130: 3129: 3126: 3122: 3118: 3114: 3111: 3109: 3105: 3101: 3097: 3096: 3095:Roman Spinner 3091: 3087: 3084: 3082: 3079: 3078: 3062: 3059: 3058: 3049: 3045: 3041: 3037: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3026: 3022: 3018: 3014: 3010: 3006: 3002: 2998: 2994: 2990: 2989: 2988: 2987: 2986: 2985: 2980: 2976: 2972: 2968: 2964: 2960: 2959:Laban (Bible) 2956: 2952: 2950: 2946: 2942: 2937: 2936: 2935: 2931: 2927: 2923: 2919: 2915: 2911: 2907: 2903: 2899: 2896: 2895: 2888: 2884: 2880: 2876: 2875:Rachel Carson 2872: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2862: 2858: 2854: 2850: 2846: 2845: 2844: 2840: 2836: 2831: 2827: 2824: 2819: 2815: 2812: 2810: 2807: 2805: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2799: 2795: 2793: 2789: 2785: 2781: 2777: 2773: 2769: 2765: 2761: 2757: 2754: 2753: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2735: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2729: 2725: 2721: 2718: 2717: 2711: 2707: 2703: 2700: 2699: 2690: 2686: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2668: 2664: 2660: 2659: 2645: 2641: 2637: 2636: 2635: 2631: 2627: 2626:Snowmanonahoe 2623: 2622: 2621: 2617: 2613: 2609: 2608: 2595: 2593: 2589: 2585: 2580: 2578: 2574: 2570: 2566: 2562: 2559: 2557: 2553: 2549: 2548:Snowmanonahoe 2545: 2540: 2537: 2536: 2535: 2533: 2530: 2525: 2519: 2518: 2511: 2507: 2500: 2496: 2493: 2490: 2485: 2482: 2481: 2479: 2478: 2474: 2468: 2462: 2458: 2451: 2449: 2444: 2439: 2434: 2433: 2428: 2426: 2425: 2421: 2417: 2413: 2409: 2401: 2395: 2391: 2387: 2384: 2383: 2378: 2374: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2364: 2360: 2356: 2352: 2351: 2350: 2349: 2345: 2341: 2332: 2324: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2311: 2310: 2306: 2302: 2298: 2297: 2296: 2292: 2288: 2285: 2284: 2279: 2275: 2274: 2273: 2272: 2268: 2264: 2260: 2252: 2250: 2249: 2245: 2241: 2237: 2233: 2232:primary topic 2231: 2223:Primary topic 2222: 2217: 2214: 2208: 2207: 2204: 2200: 2196: 2193: 2192: 2187: 2183: 2179: 2175: 2172: 2171: 2158: 2154: 2150: 2145: 2144: 2143: 2142: 2141: 2137: 2133: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2123: 2119: 2115: 2111: 2107: 2106: 2105: 2101: 2097: 2092: 2091: 2090: 2086: 2082: 2078: 2073: 2069: 2065: 2064: 2061: 2057: 2053: 2049: 2046: 2045: 2038: 2034: 2030: 2026: 2021: 2017: 2016: 2015: 2012: 2010: 2009: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1992: 1988: 1984: 1983:primary topic 1982: 1977: 1973: 1969: 1968: 1965: 1961: 1957: 1953: 1949: 1945: 1941: 1938: 1934: 1931: 1927: 1924:This article 1923: 1920: 1919: 1916: 1912: 1908: 1904: 1899: 1898: 1895: 1892: 1890: 1889: 1879: 1874: 1871: 1870: 1865: 1861: 1857: 1853: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1835: 1831: 1827: 1826: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1807: 1804: 1802: 1798: 1794: 1793:Labattblueboy 1790: 1786: 1783: 1782: 1761: 1758: 1754: 1750: 1746: 1745:WP:OTHERSTUFF 1742: 1741: 1740: 1736: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1722: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1705: 1701: 1697: 1693: 1689: 1684: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1675: 1671: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1661: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1645: 1641: 1637: 1633: 1629: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1604: 1600: 1596: 1592: 1588: 1587:Old Testament 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1565: 1561: 1557: 1551: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1539:Old Testament 1535: 1530: 1525: 1524: 1520: 1516: 1511: 1507: 1503: 1499: 1492: 1489: 1483: 1482: 1477: 1473: 1469: 1465: 1461: 1460: 1459: 1457: 1453: 1449: 1445: 1435: 1433: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1407: 1405: 1401: 1397: 1393: 1385: 1383: 1379: 1375: 1371: 1360: 1358: 1356: 1352: 1348: 1344: 1338: 1334: 1330: 1322: 1315: 1311: 1307: 1303: 1299: 1292: 1291: 1283: 1282:its talk page 1278: 1273: 1269: 1265: 1264: 1259: 1252: 1251: 1235: 1231: 1225: 1222: 1221: 1218: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1189: 1185: 1184: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1168: 1162: 1157: 1155: 1152: 1148: 1147: 1143: 1137: 1134: 1131: 1127: 1114: 1110: 1104: 1101: 1100: 1097: 1080: 1079: 1074: 1071: 1067: 1066: 1062: 1056: 1053: 1050: 1046: 1033: 1029: 1023: 1020: 1019: 1016: 999: 995: 991: 990: 985: 982: 978: 977: 973: 967: 964: 961: 957: 944: 940: 934: 931: 930: 927: 910: 906: 902: 901: 893: 882: 880: 877: 873: 872: 868: 862: 859: 856: 852: 839: 835: 829: 826: 825: 822: 805: 801: 797: 796: 788: 777: 775: 772: 768: 767: 763: 757: 754: 751: 747: 734: 730: 724: 721: 720: 717: 700: 696: 692: 691: 683: 672: 670: 667: 663: 662: 658: 652: 649: 646: 642: 629: 625: 619: 616: 615: 612: 595: 591: 587: 586: 578: 567: 565: 562: 558: 557: 553: 547: 544: 541: 537: 524: 520: 514: 511: 510: 507: 490: 486: 482: 481: 473: 462: 460: 457: 453: 452: 448: 442: 439: 436: 432: 419: 415: 409: 406: 405: 402: 385: 381: 378: 374: 373: 368: 367: 359: 358:Saints portal 348: 346: 343: 339: 338: 334: 328: 325: 322: 318: 306: 289: 288:documentation 285: 281: 277: 276: 268: 257: 255: 252: 248: 247: 243: 240: 237: 234: 230: 225: 221: 215: 207: 206: 196: 192: 187: 186: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 3684:Agree with @ 3561: 3559: 3533: 3513:WP:MALPLACED 3510: 3503: 3496: 3489: 3464: 3446: 3440: 3320: 3311: 3307: 3246: 3240: 3221: 3202: 3199:Weak support 3198: 3132: 3112: 3094: 3085: 3065: 3060: 3017:Saint Joseph 2897: 2870: 2755: 2715: 2701: 2649: 2639: 2598: 2581: 2560: 2538: 2516: 2515: 2503: 2456: 2454: 2442: 2435: 2405: 2381: 2359:93.96.148.42 2340:93.96.148.42 2336: 2301:93.96.148.42 2282: 2263:93.96.148.42 2256: 2229: 2226: 2212: 2209: 2190: 2173: 2149:Classicfilms 2118:Classicfilms 2081:Classicfilms 2047: 2002: 1980: 1921: 1882: 1872: 1856:Classicfilms 1805: 1784: 1731:Classicfilms 1700:Talk:Abraham 1695: 1691: 1670:Classicfilms 1656:Classicfilms 1635: 1614: 1572:Classicfilms 1563: 1552: 1527: 1497: 1495: 1487: 1484: 1448:87.194.83.80 1439: 1413: 1396:38.20.138.74 1386: 1374:65.66.144.98 1364: 1326: 1313: 1261: 1229: 1190:articles to 1181: 1174: 1173: 1108: 1076: 1027: 987: 938: 898: 892:Islam portal 833: 793: 728: 688: 623: 583: 518: 478: 472:Bible portal 413: 370: 364: 273: 220:WikiProjects 203: 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 2853:iconography 2569:Jaireeodell 2448:move review 2240:69.3.72.249 2068:69.3.72.249 2029:69.3.72.249 1987:69.3.72.249 1907:69.3.72.249 1901:article at 1838:69.3.72.249 1814:69.3.72.249 1442:—Preceding 1416:—Preceding 1390:—Preceding 1388:depictions. 1368:—Preceding 1341:—Preceding 1277:its history 148:free images 31:not a forum 3708:Categories 3598:Senorangel 3226:Randy Kryn 2849:the Rachel 2825:guideline. 2517:Relisting. 2457:not moved. 2315:Bwryan2006 1690:refers to 1266:page were 3668:Palestine 3656:Bethlehem 3581:Bethlehem 3544:Palestine 3406:EggRoll97 3340:EggRoll97 3279:EggRoll97 3250:EggRoll97 3104:contribs) 3021:Walrasiad 2926:Walrasiad 2823:WP:PTOPIC 2473:EggRoll97 1850:Comment: 1510:name page 1498:not moved 1314:not moved 377:Christian 293:Biography 239:Biography 208:is rated 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 3624:Dimadick 3304:WP:STICK 3182:Material 3160:Material 3138:Material 2857:Dimadick 2788:Contribs 2760:Jonathan 2667:contribs 2616:contribs 2588:Jeremiah 2523:Material 2416:Splashen 2379:school. 2259:Cheshvan 1508:and the 1444:unsigned 1418:unsigned 1392:unsigned 1370:unsigned 1343:unsigned 1323:Untitled 1205:Religion 1183:Religion 1136:Religion 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 3614:in the 3556:Nothing 3086:Support 3009:Rebecca 2993:Abraham 2914:Abraham 2906:Rebecca 2871:Friends 2756:Support 2584:Ezekiel 2561:Support 2412:Judaism 2402:Judaism 2114:WP:NPOV 2072:WP:NPOV 1806:Support 1785:Support 1753:WP:NPOV 1749:WP:NPOV 1694:within 1644:WP:NPOV 1599:WP:NPOV 1591:WP:NPOV 1560:WP:NPOV 1543:WP:NPOV 1232:on the 1111:on the 1030:on the 941:on the 836:on the 731:on the 704:Judaism 695:Judaism 651:Judaism 626:on the 521:on the 416:on the 210:B-class 154:WP refs 142:scholar 3566:Anselm 3539:Israel 3325:Anselm 3222:Oppose 3175:Note: 3153:Note: 3113:Oppose 3061:Oppose 2898:Oppose 2764:Nicola 2720:Anselm 2702:Oppose 2654:Coptic 2640:should 2603:Coptic 2592:Isaiah 2539:Oppose 2499:Rachel 2484:Rachel 2386:Anselm 2287:Anselm 2195:Anselm 2174:Oppose 2132:Cavila 2096:Cavila 2052:Cavila 2048:Oppose 2020:Rachel 1976:Rachel 1922:Oppose 1903:Rachel 1873:Oppose 1810:Rachel 1757:Powers 1704:Powers 1619:Powers 1564:Rachel 1529:Rachel 1333:Rachel 1272:Rachel 1268:merged 389:Saints 372:Saints 327:Saints 216:scale. 126:Google 25:Rachel 3187:Works 3165:Works 3143:Works 3117:Srnec 3100:(talk 3005:Sarah 3001:Jacob 2997:Isaac 2922:Jacob 2918:Isaac 2902:Sarah 2772:Harry 2528:Works 2408:Islam 2278:Jacob 2253:Dates 2230:clear 1981:clear 1956:Erudy 1952:Jacob 1944:David 1692:facts 1688:WP:5P 1566:. Or 1302:moved 1270:into 1263:Rahil 914:Islam 905:Islam 861:Islam 494:Bible 485:Bible 441:Bible 197:This 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 3695:talk 3691:eyal 3676:talk 3664:talk 3644:talk 3628:talk 3602:talk 3570:talk 3521:talk 3457:talk 3451:. -- 3421:talk 3363:talk 3348:talk 3329:talk 3294:talk 3260:talk 3230:talk 3212:talk 3121:talk 3044:talk 3025:talk 2975:talk 2969:. -- 2945:talk 2930:talk 2910:Leah 2908:and 2883:talk 2861:talk 2839:talk 2784:Swan 2780:Iggy 2770:and 2768:Mary 2743:talk 2724:talk 2685:talk 2663:talk 2651:That 2630:talk 2612:talk 2600:That 2573:talk 2552:talk 2510:talk 2420:talk 2390:talk 2363:talk 2344:talk 2319:talk 2305:talk 2291:talk 2267:talk 2244:talk 2236:this 2199:talk 2153:talk 2136:talk 2122:talk 2100:talk 2085:talk 2056:talk 2033:talk 1991:talk 1960:talk 1948:Adam 1935:and 1911:talk 1880:. -- 1860:talk 1842:talk 1818:talk 1797:talk 1735:talk 1674:talk 1660:talk 1636:have 1615:have 1576:talk 1519:talk 1468:talk 1452:talk 1426:talk 1400:talk 1378:talk 1351:talk 1337:John 1312:was 1194:and 1192:good 1103:High 723:High 282:and 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 3670:". 3517:Joy 3453:Joy 3417:Joy 3383:Joy 3359:Joy 3308:not 3290:Joy 3215:) 3067:Nik 3040:Joy 2971:Joy 2941:Joy 2879:Joy 2835:Joy 2786:) ( 2739:Joy 2665:) ( 2657:Guy 2614:) ( 2606:Guy 2544:the 1832:or 1791:.-- 1650:or 1605:or 1304:to 1224:Low 1196:1.0 1022:Low 933:Mid 828:Mid 618:Mid 513:Low 408:Low 176:TWL 3710:: 3697:) 3678:) 3646:) 3630:) 3604:) 3572:) 3562:St 3523:) 3459:) 3423:) 3365:) 3357:-- 3350:) 3331:) 3321:St 3318:. 3312:is 3296:) 3288:-- 3262:) 3232:) 3123:) 3102:• 3073:ai 3070:ol 3046:) 3027:) 3007:, 3003:, 2999:, 2995:, 2977:) 2965:, 2961:, 2957:, 2947:) 2932:) 2920:, 2916:, 2904:, 2885:) 2863:) 2855:. 2841:) 2833:-- 2790:) 2766:, 2762:, 2745:) 2737:-- 2726:) 2716:St 2687:) 2669:) 2648:— 2632:) 2618:) 2597:— 2590:, 2586:, 2575:) 2554:) 2520:– 2514:— 2497:→ 2486:→ 2463:. 2440:. 2422:) 2392:) 2382:St 2365:) 2346:) 2321:) 2307:) 2293:) 2283:St 2269:) 2246:) 2238:. 2201:) 2191:St 2188:. 2155:) 2138:) 2124:) 2102:) 2087:) 2058:) 2035:) 2027:. 2007:Ga 2004:Ja 2000:-- 1993:) 1985:. 1962:) 1954:). 1950:, 1946:, 1913:) 1887:Ga 1884:Ja 1862:) 1844:) 1836:. 1820:) 1799:) 1737:) 1676:) 1662:) 1578:) 1531:→ 1521:) 1470:) 1454:) 1428:) 1402:) 1380:) 1353:) 156:) 54:; 3693:( 3674:( 3662:( 3642:( 3626:( 3600:( 3568:( 3550:) 3519:( 3455:( 3419:( 3385:: 3381:@ 3378:: 3374:@ 3361:( 3346:( 3338:@ 3327:( 3292:( 3274:: 3270:@ 3258:( 3252:: 3248:@ 3228:( 3209:( 3119:( 3076:h 3042:( 3023:( 2973:( 2943:( 2928:( 2881:( 2859:( 2837:( 2782:( 2741:( 2722:( 2683:( 2675:@ 2661:( 2628:( 2610:( 2571:( 2550:( 2508:( 2469:) 2465:( 2418:( 2388:( 2361:( 2342:( 2317:( 2303:( 2289:( 2265:( 2242:( 2197:( 2151:( 2147:- 2134:( 2120:( 2098:( 2083:( 2054:( 2031:( 1989:( 1958:( 1909:( 1858:( 1840:( 1816:( 1795:( 1733:( 1672:( 1658:( 1574:( 1517:( 1466:( 1450:( 1424:( 1398:( 1376:( 1349:( 1316:. 1284:. 1236:. 1115:. 1034:. 945:. 840:. 735:. 630:. 525:. 420:. 290:. 222:: 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index